Rubin2020_PCW slack archives day2-tue-slot3b-in-kind 2020-07-15---2020-08-20

Wed 2020-07-15 03:04PM
@Ranpal (she/her/hers) has joined the channel
Thu 2020-07-16 01:18PM
@Melissa Graham has joined the channel
Wed 2020-07-22 11:57AM
@Jeff Carlin has joined the channel
Thu 2020-07-23 05:39PM
@drphilmarshall has joined the channel
Thu 2020-07-23 05:39PM
@Robert Blum has joined the channel
Robert Blum Thu 2020-07-23 05:39PM
this works
Robert Blum Thu 2020-07-23 05:40PM
from agenda
drphilmarshall Thu 2020-07-23 05:40PM
For me too!
drphilmarshall Thu 2020-07-23 05:40PM
Star it, quick
drphilmarshall Thu 2020-07-23 05:41PM
@drphilmarshall set the channel topic: Helping international in-kind proposal teams write good in-kind proposals. First of two equivalent sessions.
drphilmarshall Thu 2020-07-23 05:45PM
This (Tuesday) session's page on the PCW website:
drphilmarshall Thu 2020-07-23 05:49PM
@Greg Madejski Welcome!
Thu 2020-07-23 05:49PM
@Greg Madejski has joined the channel
Greg Madejski Thu 2020-07-23 05:50PM
Got it - thanks!
drphilmarshall Thu 2020-07-23 05:53PM
This is the late slot: 1200 PDT = 2100 CEST. The early slot is on Wednesday, at 1030 PDT = 1930 CEST. The Wednesday session Slack channel is #day3-wed-slot2b-in-kind
Thu 2020-07-30 09:08AM
@William Ostling has joined the channel
Thu 2020-07-30 05:25PM
@ajc has joined the channel
Thu 2020-07-30 08:19PM
@Luis Pineda has joined the channel
Thu 2020-07-30 11:52PM
@Yen-Chen Pan has joined the channel
Fri 2020-07-31 03:02AM
@Ilaria Musella has joined the channel
Fri 2020-07-31 03:17AM
@hhsieh has joined the channel
Fri 2020-07-31 03:25AM
@Leo Girardi has joined the channel
Fri 2020-07-31 04:22AM
@Paula has joined the channel
Fri 2020-07-31 05:34AM
@Boutigny has joined the channel
Fri 2020-07-31 05:38AM
@Merlin has joined the channel
Fri 2020-07-31 07:48AM
@Adriano Pieres has joined the channel
Fri 2020-07-31 08:06AM
@Elisa Chisari has joined the channel
Fri 2020-07-31 08:31AM
@Robert Szabo has joined the channel
Fri 2020-07-31 08:35AM
@Hiranya Peiris has joined the channel
drphilmarshall Thu 2020-08-06 02:07AM
Here's the Handbook for Proposal Teams - please take a look before the workshop, and we'll talk through it during the session!
Thu 2020-08-06 04:17PM
@Knut Olsen has joined the channel
Thu 2020-08-06 04:17PM
@Steve R has joined the channel
drphilmarshall Mon 2020-08-10 02:43PM
Workshop slides are now available for download in PDF format, from the session page on the Rubin 2020 website or directly from .
Eduardo Banados (he/his) Tue 2020-08-11 02:19PM
Hi Phil and Bob,

I have a few questions that I hope they might be answered during the workshop but I thought it'd be good to share them with you in advance.

These questions are about "software development" contributions, in particular about the "general pool of fully directable effort". In the handbook it says "proposal teams are encouraged to consider contributions of effort in this category"._

These are the questions:

If this kind of contribution was not explicitly mentioned in the LOI, can it still be part of the proposal? If we wanted to contribute with one or more people towards this effort, should we start advertising these positions this fall to start in 2021? (i.e., we would advertise the position(s) before knowing the outcome of our proposals) Or would that be too early?_ To ensure that the hired personnel for this task have the appropriate skill levels, it'd be good if somebody from Rubin Observatory could be involved in the selection process. Perhaps drafting the job ad, or simply having a look at a shortlist of candidates before a job offer is made?_Is something like this envisioned?_
Eduardo Banados (he/his) Tue 2020-08-11 04:24PM
Thanks for the answers during the live session, very useful!
For the records, these were the answers to my questions (please feel free to correct me if needed; @drphilmarshall @Robert Blum )

A1 .- Yes! In fact, any new ideas not mentioned in the original LOI would be welcome.
A2 .- A start in 2021 seems too early for software development contribution [ new question : When would it be a good starting date for a position with a large commitment towards the "general pool of fully directable effort"? ]
A3. - Rubin would be happy to be involved in the selection process and would work with the proposing teams to make this work.
drphilmarshall Tue 2020-08-11 05:29PM
A2. You could aim for a start date of October 2022, if you need to get started early. If you have some long term funding assurance, you could propose to provide effort in later years" it would be particularly useful to have available pooled effort in 2024-2026, for example (as the analysis gets going in earnest and the Rubin ops team looks to refresh the processing pipelines and other observatory software).
Iair (ya-eer) Arcavi Tue 2020-08-11 02:38PM
Is it possible to post the Zoom link for today's session here? I'm a bit lost with all of the different emails, webpages and slack channels. Thanks.
Robert Blum Tue 2020-08-11 02:40PM
Inkind session 1 zoom:
Ranpal (she/her/hers) Tue 2020-08-11 02:43PM
Bob - user will be promoted for a password since that link doesn't have it embedded
Robert Blum Tue 2020-08-11 02:45PM
Ranpal (she/her/hers) Tue 2020-08-11 02:47PM
yup i also pinned more details
Robert Blum Tue 2020-08-11 02:49PM
I will get out of the way!
Ranpal (she/her/hers) Tue 2020-08-11 02:42PM
Session:_In-kind Proposal Workshop
Date/time: Tuesday August 11, 2020 - 12:00 PDT
Link to handbook:
Zoom link:
Password: 257500
Iair (ya-eer) Arcavi Tue 2020-08-11 02:54PM
Aprajita Verma Tue 2020-08-11 04:28PM
@drphilmarshall you mentioned that the best place to view the handbook is the google version, rather than the PDF, perhaps you could pin that URL here.
drphilmarshall Tue 2020-08-11 05:26PM
Good idea, I'll do that.
Robert Blum Tue 2020-08-11 02:47PM
Thanks Ranpal!
drphilmarshall Tue 2020-08-11 02:51PM
Looking forward to seeing you all in 10 mins or so. I'll show a bunch of slides for the first part of the session, so feel free to use that time to eat something! Zoom workshops are hard work. We'll pause for questions as we go to some extent, but try to focus the second half on discussion.
ldacosta Tue 2020-08-11 02:52PM
are the values for number of cores and storage listed in the templates suggestions or requirements ? do they need to be up and running when 2024 according to the new time table ?
William O'Mullane Tue 2020-08-11 03:06PM
numbers should be seen as indicative. You should provide a model explaining your own sizing.
ldacosta Tue 2020-08-11 02:53PM
Phil your writing is excellent - can we borrow heavily on your wording ?
drphilmarshall Tue 2020-08-11 05:16PM
You are too kind, @ldacosta ! I will pass on your complements to the team that wrote the Handbook. Yes, feel free to borrow the wording from the examples and the Handbook: indeed there is no better way to demonstrate compliance with the guidelines than re-using their wording!
ldacosta Tue 2020-08-11 07:17PM
@drphilmarshall do extend my compliments
Michelle Lochner (she/her) Tue 2020-08-11 03:01PM
@drphilmarshall are your slides available somewhere and if so, can they be shared with the rest of our proposal writing team?
William O'Mullane Tue 2020-08-11 03:03PM
Knut Olsen Tue 2020-08-11 03:03PM
Slides here:
Michelle Lochner (she/her) Tue 2020-08-11 03:03PM
Fantastic thank you!
Yiannis Tsapras Tue 2020-08-11 03:02PM
Hi everyone, quick question before we start. We got feedback on two out of the 5 items we proposed as potential in-kind contributions. Does that mean the others are not considered sufficient as in-kind contribs?
Robert Blum Tue 2020-08-11 03:08PM
@Yiannis Tsapras you should get feedback n everything. It may be we accidentally left something out. Please follow up with an email response to your feedback email and we will follow up with you.
Yiannis Tsapras Tue 2020-08-11 03:18PM
Stuart Ryder Tue 2020-08-11 03:05PM
A (very early) good morning from Australia. My question is does 1 PI's worth of data access rights via in-kind contributions also come with 4 associated Junior Researchers, as in the previous MoAs with LSSTC?
Robert Blum Tue 2020-08-11 03:06PM
@Stuart Ryder yes it does.
Stuart Ryder Tue 2020-08-11 03:07PM
Thanks @Robert Blum !
Mara Salvato Tue 2020-08-11 03:13PM
Thanks for the slides and the handbook, really helpfull!
Out of curiosity, what happens when you receive the same in-kind contribution from different groups?
Sebastian Bocquet Tue 2020-08-11 03:18PM
Can PI-ship be reassigned within a team that asks for more than 1 PI?
drphilmarshall Tue 2020-08-11 05:14PM
@Sebastian Bocquet Yes: the team makes contributions and earns PI slots, and then it's up to the team who gets the slots. We'll ask the team leaders to designate PI slots when it comes time to actually grant access to the Rubin DACs.
Song Huang Tue 2020-08-11 03:18PM
I also have a question: Will the current round of LOI/proposal be the only chance? Or there will be future proposal calls down the line?
Thank you very much!
Kuijken Tue 2020-08-11 03:20PM
Can people add new items that were not mentioned in their LoI?
Aprajita Verma Tue 2020-08-11 03:21PM
yes, I believe so but Phil can confirm the process for this.
drphilmarshall Tue 2020-08-11 05:12PM
Yes: you can propose new contributions no problem, just be sure to follow the Handbook when designing them. Bob and I can advise on the appropriate recipient group for each one as needed. The "LOI Code" in the proposal section each of any new contributions should just be "N/A".
Sara Lucatello Tue 2020-08-11 03:21PM
I must have missed that we were supposed to sign up for one of the slots for the in-kind workshop. Can I still sign up for tomorrow's slot?
Michele Bannister Tue 2020-08-11 03:22PM
you can join now if you like, it was just to keep the two sessions balanced in number of attendees
Sara Lucatello Tue 2020-08-11 03:23PM
ah, ok. I wanted to join tomorrow (I am in Europe), as timing would be better.
drphilmarshall Tue 2020-08-11 05:10PM
See you then, @Sara Lucatello ! :slightly_smiling_face:
Greg Madejski Tue 2020-08-11 03:21PM
Stuart Ryder Tue 2020-08-11 03:26PM
Does a 4m-class telescope like the AAT have to be integrated into AEON, despite being 3.89m in diameter?
Stuart Ryder Tue 2020-08-11 03:27PM
Thanks for the confirmation @drphilmarshall .
Michele Bannister Tue 2020-08-11 03:26PM
When does AEON integration have to be complete?
Michele Bannister Tue 2020-08-11 03:27PM
Ok, Oct 2023 then
Stephen Smartt Tue 2020-08-11 03:27PM
Does the NOIRLab need to be in control of the allocation process - or can time be ringfenced for US, but through the telescope TAC itself
Michelle Lochner (she/her) Tue 2020-08-11 03:27PM
Some proposals may want to contribute follow-up to specific science collaborations like TVS or DESC for training sets for transient classification (for example), how would a proposal like this interact with the NOIRLab TAC?
Michelle Lochner (she/her) Tue 2020-08-11 03:34PM
Thank you @drphilmarshall !
Michelle Lochner (she/her) Tue 2020-08-11 03:35PM
The answer for everyone else is that there's a subtle difference between an active follow-up contribution and a dataset contribution. A spectroscopic follow-up training set could be considered a dataset contribution which could be for a specific science collaboration
Michele Bannister Tue 2020-08-11 03:28PM
Is telescope time, or actual telescope operating cost considered most significant?
Surhud More Tue 2020-08-11 03:30PM
Is that dollar value the same regardless of the dollar values in the original MOAs?
Michele Bannister Tue 2020-08-11 03:31PM
+1, how is the tying to exchange rates being considered...
Manda Banerji Tue 2020-08-11 03:39PM
Are the categories of contributions mutually exclusive? i.e. under no circumstances can a contribution count as a "dataset" and as a "software development" contribution?
Sarah Brough (she/her) Tue 2020-08-11 03:41PM
Google sheets can 'lose' contributions. Will it be up to proposal teams to keep a back-up copy?
Aprajita Verma Tue 2020-08-11 03:46PM
i know what phil said, but i personally would keep a back-up copy of what I entered for future reference (because I am paranoid!)
Rstreet Tue 2020-08-11 03:48PM
Yep, so would I, even though it should support versioning!
Sarah Brough (she/her) Tue 2020-08-11 03:53PM
Me too. I've had half an internationally-edited Google doc disappear at the last minute and :scream:
Eduardo Banados (he/his) Tue 2020-08-11 03:49PM
my first question above
Josue De Santiago Tue 2020-08-11 03:50PM
For directable software development, when do the particular tasks of projects will be determined?
drphilmarshall Tue 2020-08-11 04:49PM
@Josue De Santiago When the contributed developers make a work plan with the recipient group. Your proposal doesn't need to say what the tasks will be (although it could). The detailed plan can be updated to include the work plan when it is made; the statement of work will probably always just say "X FTE of directable effort" as the deliverable.
JJ Kavelaars Tue 2020-08-11 03:50PM
For directed effort, I guess there will be a scope / area of expertise within which the directed effort is restricted? So we can say we will contribute dev effort to certain sub-systems or such (via mutual agreement)
rmandelb Tue 2020-08-11 04:08PM
Summarizing Phil's answer since there was interest from others on Zoom and I think some people are dropping off the line: yes, that's correct. You can indeed dedicate the directable effort to a specific recipient subsystem. And then the subsystem/SC (recipient) may have some constraints on the directable effort in order to work effectively as a team. @drphilmarshall please add/modify anything else as needed, but I wanted to get something down in slack.
drphilmarshall Tue 2020-08-11 04:51PM
No, that's right: first identify the appropriate recipient group for the directable effort, then talk to them about needed skills and expertise (and even tasks, although this isn't required for the proposal).
Surhud More Tue 2020-08-11 03:51PM
For directable software development, how do we fill up the activities and deliverables sections, as they will be quite non-specific?
rmandelb Tue 2020-08-11 03:53PM
Note that one of the example proposals in the handbook is for directable effort, so please do check it out. (The deliverable in that case is the effort.)
Surhud More Tue 2020-08-11 03:54PM
rmandelb Tue 2020-08-11 03:55PM
It's the one that starts on page 50, just FYI. "Near-term Directable Software Development Effort in an LSST Science Collaboration" - .
Sarah Brough (she/her) Tue 2020-08-11 03:58PM
Thank you for the recognition of the project management work.
Elisa Chisari Tue 2020-08-11 04:00PM
can the program manager be scientific staff or does one need to hire someone specifically for the role?
drphilmarshall Tue 2020-08-11 04:53PM
Scientific staff is fine. I think you want someone who can work well with whoever is controlling the resources, so that they really can help effect any needed changes. I think the relationship between the Resource Board representatives (TBD!) and the Program Managers will be important.
Stuart Ryder Tue 2020-08-11 04:01PM
Will each "Contribution Lead" be rewarded with 1 PI's worth of access in recognition of their program management effort? Or will there only be 1 PI's worth per in-kind partner?
Stuart Ryder Tue 2020-08-11 06:23PM
Thanks @drphilmarshall for confirming it is in fact 1 PI per Program Manager for their effort, not per Contribution Lead.
ldacosta Tue 2020-08-11 04:01PM
are the word limit very strict ?
ldacosta Tue 2020-08-11 04:01PM
some sections have no limit
drphilmarshall Tue 2020-08-11 04:54PM
Oops - that's a bug. Do look at all the example sections, we tried to be fairly consistent in the word limits across the subsections (Activities, Deliverables, etc)
Yiannis Tsapras Tue 2020-08-11 04:04PM
Thanks Phil, all, this was quite informative.
Michelle Lochner (she/her) Tue 2020-08-11 04:04PM
@drphilmarshall I'm afraid I'm confused and want to ask my previous question again. Imagine we have a telescope and want to contribute spectroscopic follow-up of transients as our contribution. Say we're already collaborating with a science collaboration such as TVS or DESC to provide this follow-up as a training set for classifiers. We obviously wouldn't want to go through the NOIRLab TAC because the follow-up is supposed to serve a specific purpose for the collaboration. However from page 14 of the handbook: "Data acquired in response to LSST alerts or measurements, whether in support of time domain or static sky science, are referred to as "Active follow-up programs"" which implies any time domain follow-up has to go through the TAC. I'm confused about how we can provide the required dataset to the collaboration(s) in this case since the TAC could allocate the time to someone else for a different set of targets than the science collaboration may want.
Michelle Lochner (she/her) Tue 2020-08-11 04:10PM
So @drphilmarshall you're saying this would basically be an exception to the rule and could be considered a dataset because it's in collaboration with a science collaboration already?
Michelle Lochner (she/her) Tue 2020-08-11 04:12PM
I imagine there's quite a few examples of people wanting to contribute follow-up to achieve some specific goal for a specific collaboration so it'd be helpful to make it crystal clear whether or not this would need to go through the TAC (I think collaborations would also need to plan what follow-up will be available)
drphilmarshall Tue 2020-08-11 04:55PM
Agreed. Flagging this to @Robert Blum and we'll check the Handbook to see if we can improve it.
Michelle Lochner (she/her) Tue 2020-08-11 04:05PM
fine by me Phil! :slightly_smiling_face:
Stella Tue 2020-08-11 04:08PM
If for one team, each (future) PI has a totally independent proposal, how do we have to structure our application?
Stephen Smartt Tue 2020-08-11 04:11PM
thanks Phil, Greg and Bob (and all questions!) very useful. :clap:
Stella Tue 2020-08-11 04:11PM
Many thanks, I now got it !
Sandro Dias Pinto Vitenti Tue 2020-08-11 04:12PM
So, can someone that is already a PI (not through in-kind) contribute a fraction of her time in the LOI?
Michelle Lochner (she/her) Tue 2020-08-11 04:13PM
Thank you so much @drphilmarshall this was super helpful!
Sandro Dias Pinto Vitenti Tue 2020-08-11 04:13PM
Michele Bannister Tue 2020-08-11 04:13PM
Are there any outreach contributions that could be considered in-kind?
Aprajita Verma Tue 2020-08-11 04:17PM
it would need to benefit the US community and complement the existing US EPO efforts, so probably best to discuss preliminary ideas with Amanda and her team.
Michele Bannister Tue 2020-08-11 04:19PM
Let's take that it would be integrated with the EPO team's work as a given.
Knut Olsen Tue 2020-08-11 04:22PM
There's a section in the Handbook about direct contributions to Rubin Operations, which I think applies here. I think Aprajita's advice is right, handbook says "Those teams proposing these contributions should work directly with Rubin staff to develop these parts of their proposals."
Aprajita Verma Tue 2020-08-11 04:23PM
in principle, i just noted the primary contact for EPO in the handbook is @drphilmarshall so contact him in the first instance.
Michele Bannister Tue 2020-08-11 04:35PM
Ok, neat - thanks all for the details. Just trying to spin ideas of what in-kind might look like in this context (e.g. providing materials in additional languages?)
Aprajita Verma Tue 2020-08-11 04:37PM
language support might already be planned (e.g. via zooniverse) but worthwhile running your list of ideas past phil
Michele Bannister Tue 2020-08-11 04:38PM
Ok, thanks - we will brainstorm and send
drphilmarshall Tue 2020-08-11 04:57PM
Sounds good - thanks @Michele Bannister , and for the helpful answers @Aprajita Verma ! :slightly_smiling_face:
Robert Blum Tue 2020-08-11 05:41PM
Speaking of outreach, I enjoyed reading the quotes on megaconstellations by @Michele Bannister in the NYT today.
Iair (ya-eer) Arcavi Tue 2020-08-11 04:13PM
Thank you!
Mara Salvato Tue 2020-08-11 04:14PM
Suppose we are speaking about photoz. the best photoz are obtained by combining Rubin data with other ancillary data .are these data made available by Rubin? or is the proposer that has to take care of the merging ?
drphilmarshall Tue 2020-08-11 05:00PM
I think you could propose either to provide (and support!) an ancillary dataset that could be combined with the LSST data, or you could propose to provide (and support!) a "value added catalog" where you had already combined the dataset with the LSST data. Either way, the ancillary data would need to be hosted at a Rubin IDAC such that the LSST community could use it (or you'd need a convincing plan to enable access to the LSST science community otherwise).
drphilmarshall Tue 2020-08-11 05:01PM
It you were going to do the merging anyway, you should propose the combined catalog and the underlying ancillary dataset as the same contribution: that's what would have the highest scientific impact I think.
Robert Lupton Tue 2020-08-11 05:40PM
One of the concerns from Rubin DM is that you'd have to validate your algorithm using Rubin data (as e.g. p(z) as a function of colour-colour-colour-... is a function the implicit radial weighting from our photometric algorithms). And, worse, re-validate if we change the photometric algorithm.
So it's not just "deliver a set of distributions", it's quite a lot more than that.
Naoki Yasuda Tue 2020-08-11 04:16PM
Can the future observations of LSST targets which will be done by us (non-US PI) on our telescope be considered as in-kind contribution as value-added catalog if the data will be made public to LSST scientists or US community within a certain period? Probably we (non-US PI) will have more access to our telescope than we can provide as in-kind contribution.
drphilmarshall Tue 2020-08-11 05:07PM
In order to count as an in-kind contribution, the data you take would need to be shared promptly with the US community (rather than first exploited locally and then shared). Is that what you were asking, @Naoki Yasuda ?
Naoki Yasuda Tue 2020-08-11 08:51PM
@drphilmarshall Thank you for the reply. It is good to know there is a way to contribute telescope time without going through NOIRLab TAC. The followings are follow-up questions. In this case, I expect a weighting factor will be downgraded compared to a pure US PI open-time. Do you have a rough value for this? In addition, I suppose the recipient will be a science collaboration which will benefit directly from this dataset instead of NOIRLab and we should contact with them to make a feasible and useful observing plan. Is this right?
drphilmarshall Tue 2020-08-11 05:34PM
Here's the link to the I mentioned this a couple of times during the session, indicating that its a better place to copy and paste example proposal sections from. Hope it helps!
Surhud More Wed 2020-08-12 01:58AM
Hi @drphilmarshall ,one more question: if we hire a software professional, does this person eat up one of the junior positions under a PI? Or is that going to be counted separately? The software professional, for example, may not be an astronomer.
Hiranya Peiris Wed 2020-08-12 04:05AM
Is there a recording of this session?
Ranpal (she/her/hers) Wed 2020-08-12 04:06AM
Didn't get to it yet, hope to have it later today though (Tucson time)
Ranpal (she/her/hers) Wed 2020-08-12 12:57PM
recording is now posted:
Hiranya Peiris Wed 2020-08-12 06:11AM
@drphilmarshall @Robert Blum I have been asked by colleagues to seek clarification on the following queries on the active followup process:

How will the 'weighting' be justified? Since we still have to pay for 100% of the telescope time, e.g. a 0.25 weighting means a PI is 4x as expensive.
We would like to release our spectra for LSST alerts directly through TNS within 48 hours, for LSST alert triggers from the LSST community. Is that not better than providing them to a single US PI?
It is not our telescope so we can not guarantee full AEON implementation, but can arrange to receive triggers from an AEON interface that we then execute. The triggers could come from all LSST:ers, or from selected groups as TAC:ed, or graded by a TAC. We would need to do the scheduling based on magnitude, RA, and observing conditions. Is that acceptable?
In case the above arrangement is acceptable, is it also OK to impose a restriction on the type of targets - e.g. extragalactic transients, or supernova classifications - but not open up to all science (CV, AGN, GRB..) to not get in conflict with local TAC? Should we ask an LSST SC to endorse such a scheme?
Thanks for any clarifications.
Ariel Goobar Wed 2020-08-12 11:20AM
With regards to value-added data sets: is there any kind of embargo against publishing science papers based on these prior to handing it in to the Rubin data facility?
Tim Holt (He/Him) Wed 2020-08-12 01:53PM
Are the PI rights linked to the institution/proposal, or the individual? And are they transferable?
Tim Holt (He/Him) Wed 2020-08-12 01:54PM
i'll ask it in the Wednesday slot. slack.
Ranpal (she/her/hers) Thu 2020-08-13 05:31AM
The recording of the live session is here:
Eduardo Banados (he/his) Mon 2020-08-17 09:59AM
Regarding telescope time; is it necessary to also submit this form that is mentioned in the handbook or is just for reference?
Robert Blum Mon 2020-08-17 06:58PM
Hi Eduardo. Please reach out to @Steve R ( ). He can help you.
Steve R Tue 2020-08-18 10:50AM
Please include it with the proposal, thanks.
Eduardo Banados (he/his) Thu 2020-08-20 01:38PM
Hi Steve, thanks for your help with preparing the in-kind proposals. I have one more question about this form:_

The column "eligible costs" has Euros in parenthesis. Just wanted to double check if you would like the values in Euros or Dollars.